As county considers Laura's Law, a mother reflects

I reached Amanda Wilcox by phone on March 5, the birthday of her daughter, Laura.

If Laura, the valedictorian of her Nevada County high school class, had not been gunned down Jan. 10, 2001, she’d have turned 32 on Tuesday. Who knows where her promising life would have led?

A sophomore at Haverford College, Laura was filling in during her winter break at the reception desk at the Nevada County Department of Behavioral Health.

When Laura learned Scott Thorpe was on his way, she messaged a co-worker who had been the object of Thorpe’s scary attention. Thorpe’s family had repeatedly warned authorities that the 40-year-old recluse, owner of an arsenal of guns, was a danger to himself and others.

In court, Thorpe was represented by a public defender, Tom Anderson. Thorpe was found not guilty by reason of insanity. He’s now a patient at Napa State Hospital.

In 2002, Laura’s Law, which establishes a legal means of pressing the dangerously mentally ill into treatment, was passed by the California Legislature. To win reluctant votes, counties were given discretion over enacting Laura’s Law. Moreover, no money could be shifted from voluntary treatment to fund the potentially compulsory program. Out of the gate, two strikes.

To date, only Laura’s tiny Northern California county has fully embraced the law that allows interested parties — family, police, social workers — to request court intervention on behalf of individuals whose instability has been well-documented with hospitalizations or incarcerations.

Thanks in part to the zeal of rookie North County Supervisor Dave Roberts, the San Diego County Board of Supervisors will soon consider a top-to-bottom review of the county’s mental-health safety net and how Laura’s Law might strengthen it.

As always, Laura’s Law faces familiar obstacles: funding rules in favor of voluntary treatment; possible lawsuits defending the civil rights of the mentally ill; and, not least, the county’s investment — and natural pride — in various voluntary programs already in place.

Tentatively scheduled for March 19, the debate could get strangled in the weeds. Nothing could come of it.

That’s why the smart, dedicated advocates for Laura’s Law — and I have heard from many of them the past couple of years — need to step up and make the case better than I can in my ration of column inches.

To Laura’s mother, an articulate, even-keeled school board trustee, the refusal of the state’s counties to adopt her daughter’s law is “very frustrating.”

In Nevada County, “the outcome is better than anyone envisioned,” she says.

In this remote neck of California, home to fewer residents than live in Escondido, the sample pool may be small — but the implications are huge.

Out of 57 referrals from 2008 to 2012, 24 resulted in formal court petitions. Of those 24, only four resulted in a court order. The rest were resolved by the voluntary acceptance of treatment, according to Judge Tom Anderson.

Yes, you read that right.

Thorpe’s public defender has donned judge’s robes and now enforces Laura’s Law.

“Why would anyone oppose this?” Anderson said during a phone interview.

When factoring in the full costs of jailing and hospitalization, Nevada County estimates $1.81 is saved for every dollar spent on the program.

In Los Angeles, a minuscule Laura’s Law pilot program has shown similarly positive results.

Mrs. Wilcox is heartened that state lawmakers of both parties are pushing bills to make Laura’s Law easier to put in place and fund.

A horrific run of suicidal slaughters, culminating in Newtown, Conn., has injected some resolve into Sacramento, it seems. Lancing the boil of violently suicidal mental illness is one of the nation’s Job Ones, along with gun control and cultural violence.

I asked Laura’s mother what she would say to the San Diego County supervisors as they consider the practical utility of her daughter’s law.

She answered with three questions:

“Why wouldn’t you get those who need treatment into treatment? Why wouldn’t you save money? Why wouldn’t you make the community safer?”

I asked her what she believes is needed before Laura’s Law will be accepted throughout the Golden State.

“The people in the counties need to push it,” she said. “Really push it.”